Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31066177›Full record

Trial reportJournal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.)2019

Incidence, prevalence, and predictors of treatment-resistant hypertension with intensive blood pressure lowering.

Steven M Smith, Matthew J Gurka, Almut G Winterstein, Carl J Pepine, Rhonda M Cooper-DeHoff

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Journal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.), 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

17 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Advances in Hypertension Management: Insights from the Latest European Guidelines.Journal of cardiovascular development and disease · 2025
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Observational
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Steven M SmithDepartment of Pharmacotherapy & Translational Research, College of Pharmacy, Gainesville, Florida.ORCID 0000-0002-0201-839X
Matthew J GurkaDepartment of Health Outcomes & Biomedical Informatics, College of Medicine, Gainesville, Florida.
Almut G WintersteinDepartment of Pharmaceutical Outcomes & Policy, College of Pharmacy, Gainesville, Florida.
Carl J PepineDivision of Cardiovascular Medicine, Department of Medicine, College of Medicine, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida.
Rhonda M Cooper-DeHoffDepartment of Pharmacotherapy & Translational Research, College of Pharmacy, Gainesville, Florida.

Funding

Brain-Gut Microbiome-Immune Axis in HypertensionR01HL132448 · NHLBI · UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA · PI Carl J Pepine, Steven Michael Smith · 2016 to 2026
$4.5M
BRAIN ANGIOTENSIN IN HYPERTENSIVE NEURONS IN CULTURER01HL033610 · NHLBI · UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA · PI RAIZADA, MOHAN K., SUMNERS, COLIN · 1985 to 2017
$4.3M
Advancing Personalized Hypertension Care through Big Data ScienceK01HL138172 · NHLBI · UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA · PI SMITH, STEVEN MICHAEL · 2018 to 2022
$726k
NHLBI NIH HHS K01 HL138172NHLBI NIH HHS R01 HL033610NHLBI NIH HHS R01 HL132448
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Recent guidelines call for more intensive blood pressure (BP)-lowering and a less-stringent treatment-resistant hypertension (TRH) definition, both of which may increase the occurrence of this high-risk phenotype. We performed a post hoc analysis of 11 784 SPRINT and ACCORD-BP participants without baseline TRH, who were randomized to an intensive (<120 mm Hg) or standard (<140 mm Hg) systolic BP target. Incidence, prevalence, and predictors of TRH were compared using the updated definition (requiring ≥4 drugs to achieve BP < 130/80 mm Hg) during intensive treatment, vs the former definition (requiring ≥4 drugs to achieve BP < 140/90 mm Hg) during standard treatment. Incidence/prevalence of apparent refractory hypertension (RFH; uncontrolled BP despite ≥5 drugs) was similarly compared. Overall, 5702 and 6082 patients were included in the intensive and standard treatment cohorts, respectively. Crude TRH incidence using the updated definition under intensive treatment was 30.3 (95% CI, 29.3-31.4) per 100 patient-years, compared with 9.7 (95% CI, 9.2-10.2) using the prior definition under standard treatment. Point prevalence using the prior TRH definition at 1-year was 7.5% in SPRINT and 14% in ACCORD vs 22% and 36%, respectively, with the updated TRH definition. Significant predictors of incident TRH included number of baseline antihypertensive drugs, having diabetes, baseline systolic BP, and Black race. Incidence of apparent RFH was also significantly greater using the updated vs prior definition (4.5 vs 1.0 per 100 person-years). Implementation of the 2017 hypertension guideline, including lower BP goals for most individuals, is expected to substantially increase treatment burden and incident TRH among the hypertensive population.

Indexed as

AgedAntihypertensive AgentsBlood PressureCase-Control StudiesCoronary VasospasmDiabetes MellitusFemaleGuidelines as TopicHumansHypertensionIncidenceMaleMiddle AgedPredictive Value of TestsPrevalenceProspective StudiesAntihypertensive AgentsACCORDepidemiologyhypertensionresistant hypertensionSPRINT

Identifiers

PMID31066177
PMCPMC6565478

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.